I would not be surprised if Microsoft has already offered huge sums of cash to onLive and are planning to take the company over few months before onLive goes live. Could the next generation of Xbox be called Xbox onLive or maybe even the Xbox 360 with a firmware update, since the web plug-in is only 1mb. More I think about it, this seems like a great business model for Microsoft, they would be able to offer games on demand and also offer games from physical media, this will help ease gamers into the transition of digital distribution and have options for those who are not ready (no internet, no credit card, fear and so on...).

Maybe this was the plan for onLive, create innovative technology and make money on selling its intellectual properties and patents. The technology seems to prove its possible, but onLive will have to sustain a monumental infrastructure and fund a huge advertising campaign for few years until it gains momentum, and a company like Microsoft with its huge dedicated user base and unlimited funds may be better suited to move the service forward and sustainable. The founder of onLive also developed the webTV which had the same business model as onLive (cheap and accessible computing for a specific need) which was also sold to Microsoft.

This idea has been floating around for awhile -- remember the guys that were going to do this to enable mobile gaming? Only they got it wrong... no-one wants to play Crysis on a handheld.

I find it a fascinating idea, and even more fascinating if they have actually made it work. But what about the infrastructure they need to put in place, and maintain? Has anyone done the math on what their data centres are going to co$t???

What really intrigues me, though, is the tantalizing idea that this could potentially lead to a quantum leap in game graphics -- theroretically, a service like OnLive could become a "console" platform publisher in and of itself, and develop exclusive first-party games that utilize next-generation technology, which would be entirely outside the economic reach of even the hardest-core gamegfx nuts. It's the same amount of pixels any way you look at it -- might as well be raytraced in real-time. Think the power of 16 PS3s in SLI, or more... OnLive might want such an exclusive "future" game, or special edition of a proven hit game, to drive adoption.

If you can stop worrying about upgrading your gfx card, that'll also leave a few pennies for new tactile controllers, which again could be platform-specific. Voila, a new Wii with ILM gfx...

A lot of people seem to be yammering on about how this isn't possible, talking about issues like bandwidth, latency etc. However, here it is, being released in a few months. The assumption to make (and it's not an unfair assumption) is that OnLive is aware of these problems and they have been fixed or dealt with. What would be the point in spending money to release a service that doesn't work!?

This is the shape of things to come and the competition may well find itself well and trully cluster f*cked.

This is the future gentlemen..

This is the future. I don't like it, but I recognize the future when I see it, just like I recognized the importance of the Wii as soon as the controller was revealed.

This is the future of gaming....I'm glad some of the bigger 3rd parties are giving them support. I can see Nintendo adopting a simular service in the future....Maybe that's why they haven't gotten a HDD for the Wii as yet???

Anyways getting sidetracked.....I hope ONLIVE all the best, I think it's great to see them working towards something new.

Even if it isnt successful it shows what is possible with today's technology....and if they are able to get a good user base we may be looking at a new comer in the industry. Something we need badly.

the proof is in the pudding... lets see some real games being played and then we'll see what's what

I've read this article before in a game magazine, and they raised some very interesting questions. One would be the library for the service. Even though it would be huge, would old games be taken off of it? If that's the case, then we won't see those games again. Another point, which is mine, is multiplayer. Many games are multiplayer now and with the content being streamed through this service, plus the feedback required to play the game online, would be rather intensive I'd say on your broadband. Another thing is financial cost of it all. You're paying a subscription service, which is fine. But surely streaming such content on to your computer would count towards your monthly download limit? You'd be hitting your monthly limit before you know it.

Also, if this was at competitve retail prices, this would slow down the hardware industry for computers. Games and media is the drive behind making computers better and stronger.

That whole remote play thing is messy at home when trying it on the PS3->PsP. It sure won't get better when the average ping is added to the game's input reaction time. Streaming the game over LAN at a local trade show demo might yield good results, but once the thing hits a real internet connection, things will get messy. The ping, your ISP angry about your endless amounts of streaming data, the consumer unhappy of dying because of lag. The technical problems of a field test might be too much for many games.

But for games where tight controls don't matter, this might work. Peggle, Puzzle Quest, Adventure games, board games, turn based games, etc. [Except we want all games play like the new Prince of Persia that is.] But you did not need a supercomputer for those games to begin with, so one of their best arguments goes out the window right there. The very games requiring those "super computers" are those which also require zero delay input.

We also have to see what this is supposed to cost, but with the 360 already at $200 and NOTHING to prevent Sony and MS from doing the same stunt with some shortlived techdemo on their consoles, ONLIVE marketing really is in trouble. Before they ensnare people with never having to upgrade ever again, those same people have to be excited about playing games on that thing. Continuously upgrading the back end of the service is also a problem. Essentially you will be buying rendering time on a very fast computer. Ask around, has anybody ever turned renting out computers into a viable business on such a scale?

Oh also, according to another website (dunno if i'm allowed to say where), they're saying the onlive box will be <$100, and you can alternatively install a ~1mb program on a pc (presumably not free), rather than using the onlive box through a tv.

This is potentially very exciting, 'though of course you won't get any nintendo games on it, or whatnot. A perusal of some other interweb sites reveals that they're quoting 1ms (i.e. negligible) lag times, 'though i'm not sure if that includes video lag, or just pack/unpack.

I'm guessing there'll be a monthly subscription fee or something. It will be interesting to see what servers are like, as there will presumably be big peaks and troughs in usage (i.e. school leaving time, etc.).

Still; very interesting development.

I'm excited by the potential here. This could change everything.